How to become a Buddha in 5 weeks... or: THE EDU THREAD

[Hister]

The unit radius: The low number on hoplites makes them fight fight tight and that is ok by me. But should principes, ensiferi etc fight equally tight.(hoplites 0.23, principes 0.24). I dont think it looks good. For principes 0.3 is enough I think.

As Aper said, I would leave them as they are.

This could be done be increasing the delay by 15-20 points

I'm all in favor for this idea but it will not be done by me - am kinda not in the mood to fiddle with the EDU for now he he. So if there is a hero out there that has the stamina to do that job he is more then welcome.

[Hister]

oh and while I remember. I think I did a custombattle as syracuse(or italiotes) and the psiloi didnt seem to have sprites assigned to them.

Noted on the bugs list.

[Pode]

Discussion seems to have moved on a bit while I was on travel, but I wanted to say that I think it's important when considering the balance between pike, hoplite, and sword / jav infantry to separate the performance of the individual soldier and small unit from the historical record of armies composed of those units. My sense is that Roman strategic victories owed more ultimately to their manpower advantage compared to the Hellenic armies, and the willingness this fostered to accept both tactical and strategic risk. As was once said, in war if you're not willing to die for your cause but your enemy is willing to die for his, a terrible weight has been set on one side of the scales. At a tactical level, the triplex acies gave Roman formations greater staying power and flexibility, where their leadership tradition and command structure allowed the effective use of their reserves. Hellenic generals leading their cavalry couldn't command reserves even if they had had any. The superior reach of pike and hoplite formations I would think would have made them superior in face to face combat, but I think historically Rome overcame this with the morale and tactical flexibility advantages above.

[DaVinci]

Discussion seems to have moved on a bit while I was on travel, but I wanted to say that I think it's important when considering the balance between pike, hoplite, and sword / jav infantry to separate the performance of the individual soldier and small unit from the historical record of armies composed of those units. My sense is that Roman strategic victories owed more ultimately to their manpower advantage compared to the Hellenic armies, and the willingness this fostered to accept both tactical and strategic risk. As was once said, in war if you're not willing to die for your cause but your enemy is willing to die for his, a terrible weight has been set on one side of the scales. At a tactical level, the triplex acies gave Roman formations greater staying power and flexibility, where their leadership tradition and command structure allowed the effective use of their reserves. Hellenic generals leading their cavalry couldn't command reserves even if they had had any. The superior reach of pike and hoplite formations I would think would have made them superior in face to face combat, but I think historically Rome overcame this with the morale and tactical flexibility advantages above.

... agree, and i would mention as well unmatched militaristic discipline and training for the citizens, but not special manpower in the sense of physical power, or a heroic warrior ethos, but just for that time quasi perfect "soldiers".
Rome was already a military-states-structure in nearly every aspect, paired with the absolute will to subjugate the Italian folks, especially in the respective time of the mod. And it is just known, that Hoplite/Pike Phalanx warfare wasn't a stopper for the Roman legions.

For the reflection in this mod, it would be good, if AI Legionaries indeed go for flanking maneuvers, while AI Hoplites/Pikes go for frontal attack/defence. I hope we will see such AI behaviour.

[Aper]

... agree, and i would mention as well unmatched militaristic discipline and training for the citizens, but not special manpower in the sense of physical power, or a heroic warrior ethos, but just for that time quasi perfect "soldiers".

About discipline and training, in our timeframe legionaries were still part-time soldiers, so their training was probably not comparable with that of the hellenistic professionals... and about the discipline, sure, officiers could give the soldiers harsh punishment (much harsher than their greek counterpart, according to Polybius), but many times legionaries were so aggressive that they "attacked without orders", or roman generals gave the order to attack because the soldiers were so ferocious that they would have attacked anyway, regardless their commanders. Remember, the supreme Roman ethic value was the "virtus", a mixture of masculine values that found their expression in war as an almost suicidal bravery.

Some famous examples: battles of Trebbia river, Cannae and other minor fights in the II punic war; Pydna, Gergovia, Gamala (judaic war), and in late antiquity, Strasbourg. In these battles legionaries almost matched gallic warriors in their will for a simple, frontal attack without tricks that could have been ruined their display of bravery, displays that were accurately encouraged by the commanders, that could count on soldiers almost as valorous as the best barbarians, but still (barely) enough disciplined to perform complex tactics.

Why on modern times Romans are seen as perfectly disciplined cyborgs? The responsibles for this misconception are Renaissance italian intellectuals, because they felt the armies of their time needed better discipline, and since they were fanatically classicistic, they took the roman army as a very idealized eternal model for this attribute. It's not surprising anyway they actually knew very little about the Romans they exalted so much... because of their still primitive filological tools, they can't "filter" evidences so well...

Anyway, something is true in this prejudice, because in the Imperial era the cult of the Virtus begun to fade: in the Trajan column we can see that legionaries are often kept as reserve, or utilized as military engineers (they work on fortifications, on war machines, and IIRC on clearing the path of the army from the trees); the actual "dirty work", the bloody, gory slaughter we like so much was the duty of the forces of allied barbarians, like the glorious Batavians, who considered themselves as strong as the legions (or even better).

[DaVinci]

All "true", or rather subject of an ongoing intellectual discussion for sure.

Aper, as you citated a comment by me: This sentence was referred exclusively on the timeframe of PI and the time as the once little Roman republic grew to power. Perhaps a misconception of what i wanted to express ... quasi perfect "citizen-soldiers", probable quite unmatched in comparision to the other italian folks.
There must be a certain reason, why legionaries (these roman and latin citizens, and of course a lot responsibility by the commanders) were able to subjugate Italy quite that fast, despite the later 'Imperium building'. There were hard times before of course, vs. the Samnites etc., but in the end, they were just superior, and we know, that the legions fought mainly with the these legionaries, and the socii-aux parts of the legions were actually reserves and flank protections.

In all this historical consideration, or in conclusion: It is very reasonable imo., to have especially Principes relative better to Ensiferi etc., and also since we already discussed those points long and detailled, what your (Aper) combat model shall reflect: not simply the equipment of units, but the circumstances, as far as we know (or guess) and can reflect them.
This was also the initial reason (i think), as you invented your formula's with the morale value as indicator/manipulator for all concerning combat stats. And i think this combat model is a masterpiece, means, for this timeframe/mod a very fitting system, perhaps a perfect "tool".

Btw., the hellenic Hoplites were citizens as well, and not professional soldiers in the sense of the word, besides some actual mercenaries, which could reflect the only real soldiers.

[Hister]

Good points Pode!

For the reflection in this mod, it would be good, if AI Legionaries indeed go for flanking maneuvers, while AI Hoplites/Pikes go for frontal attack/defence. I hope we will see such AI behaviour.

But isn't this happening already with latest EDU???

[DaVinci]

Is it? I don't know, but if so then a major AI battle behaviour is done already. I mean, not only that Legionaries would go for flanks, but also that Hoplites/Pikes go frontal for defence and attack, and just don't flank at all?

[Hister]

Yes that is what Aper aimed for and what this EDU is supposed to deliver although I have to admit I haven't tested the scenario we scrutinize here.

[king_of_kings]

What are the factions in this mod?? is macedonia included??

[Hister]

Macedonia doesn't have it's own faction - mod is centered around Italian peninsula. Macedonian falang is present though as a force summoned by Italiotae. Eiperote phalanx is present to.

Otherwise mod has all the major factions present in Italy. Check the mod it and you'll see.

[SigniferOne]

Hi guys, I have a question about the applicability of this model for Medieval 2.

So the lethality value is not used in Med 2, meaning that if it's the last value of the stat_pri line, it is ignored:

stat_pri 4, 2, javelin, 55, 6, thrown, missile_mechanical, piercing, spear, 0, 1, this value ignored

Is the delay value used for balancing? In other words, this value?

stat_pri 4, 2, javelin, 55, 6, thrown, missile_mechanical, piercing, spear, 0, 1

[Pode]

IIRC that delay in M2 is over and above the delay imposed by the animation, so balancing can be undone by animation changes, which was not intuitively obvious to me.

[SigniferOne]

Huh? I didn't understand that.

As far as I know, this value is disabled (not working) in Medieval 2:

stat_pri 4, 2, javelin, 55, 6, thrown, missile_mechanical, piercing, spear, 0, 1, this value ignored

[Pode]

Sorry, was in a rush and didn't explain the details of my thinking.

stat_pri 4, 2, javelin, 55, 6, thrown, missile_mechanical, piercing, spear, 0, 1
If I understand you correctly, the red zero indicates the delay between attacks, and you're asking if adjusting that number is the tool to use for balancing (since ), since M2TW doesn't use the lethality number and the attack/defense values are set by the real combat system.

I don't know what the PI team has decided to use for balance tweaking, delay seems like the best candidate to me. I seem to recall, though, that in an attempt to get around the bugged two hander animation early on with M2, it was discovered that delay was not the total time between attacks, but rather the time between the end of one attack animation and the start of another. Since the speed of various animations varied, swapping out a working animation for the bugged one drastically altered the unit's effectiveness. So if you use delay to balance, just keep in mind that two units with the same attack, defense, and delay values will only be equal if they also use the same animation.

This is memory of something I never worked with, but saw discussed years ago. So I reserve the right to be completely and totally wrong in all particulars

[SigniferOne]

Alright thanks a lot for that, I'll keep it in mind.

In other news, there are a few bugs in the otherwise very fine EDU:

Equites Hirpini and Pentri have prec as one of their attack attributes.

Same thing with Equites Brettii. I would really recommend doing a search for 'prec' throughout all of the EDU.

[Pode]

Alright thanks a lot for that, I'll keep it in mind.

In other news, there are a few bugs in the otherwise very fine EDU:

Equites Hirpini and Pentri have prec as one of their attack attributes.

Same thing with Equites Brettii. I would really recommend doing a search for 'prec' throughout all of the EDU.

Are they jav cav? 'Cause then it might make some sense: ride up within range, hurl a volley, then smash into them as they try to reform after casualties.

[SigniferOne]

I just don't think the game understands it for cavalry, correct me if I'm wrong.

[Hister]

I just don't think the game understands it for cavalry, correct me if I'm wrong.

It works perfectly Signifer and is as is meant to be. Please refer to EDU I'll now post on internal PI II forum.

[DaVinci]

Yep, iirc, prec attribute even works for cav with a bow animation.